Ukraine: Witness the rise of a new Russian Empire, live!

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Andrew1975**

BrotherOfBone wrote:
Riot police exempt... What's stopping them killing protestors??

About 40,000 Russian soldiers on the boarder, which is the point of them being there. TO STOP THE CIVIL WAR.

**AlmightyWalrus**

Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

In fact, no. THE WEST is the aggressor, not Russia. When the Soviet Union collapsed, Russia was promised that "NATO would not expand an inch eastwards". In the two decades since then, NATO has expanded almost right up to its borders. And the EU is catching up fast too. What Russia fears most is encirclement - as it has done for centuries. Several centuries of repeated invasions from European powers combined with indefensible borders has made Russia wary of future invasion.

The West is not synonymous with NATO. Further, arguing that a nation that invades another sovereign nation and annexes part of that second nation's territory isn't an aggressor is insane. Sorry if that sounds rude, but it is utterly crazy. What happens in Ukraine, while in the interest of Russia, is not for Russia to decide. Before you start going on about Western influences, remember that Russia's been fething about with Ukraine for years. Some of the complaints are probably legit (unpaid gas bills etc.), but there's a bunch of BS where Russia's been trying to strongarm Ukraine into doing what it wants.

That is not to say that "the West" is completely innocent, of course it's not all Russia's fault, but trying to somehow paint "the West" as the aggressors when Russia's the part that's invaded another nation is bonkers.

**Shadow Captain Edithae**

Right...well I think the idea that encircling Russia with a hostile military alliance and fostering a violent revolution by fascist groups that overthrows a key ally of Russia is not aggression ... is also bonkers.

If anything, Russia and the West are both aggressors, and Ukraine is caught in the middle. What we're seeing is a tug of war over a valuable economic and strategic region. Both sides have an agenda, and both sides are using dirty tricks. Neither side cares about the best interests of Ukraine.

**AlmightyWalrus**

The thing is though, all the deals with covert people on both sides working in Ukraine is speculation. Plausible speculation, yes, but still speculation, whereas we know that Russia took part of another nation at gunpoint. Equally blaming "the West" for being aggressive in such a situation is rather unfair. Until we have confirmation of the West's involvment in the riots (which might never appear, seeing as it could potentially not be true), putting equal blame on "the West" isn't actually based on anything other than conjecture.

**Jihadin**

As long as we do not start shipping upgraded combat gear to Ukraine.

**Dreadclaw69**

Jihadin wrote:
As long as we do not start shipping upgraded combat gear to Ukraine.

Especially not with our labels on them. If the Russians want to use/provide sanitized gear we may as well respond in kind.

**Andrew1975**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
The thing is though, all the deals with covert people on both sides working in Ukraine is speculation. Plausible speculation, yes, but still speculation, whereas we know that Russia took part of another nation at gunpoint. Equally blaming "the West" for being aggressive in such a situation is rather unfair. Until we have confirmation of the West's involvment in the riots (which might never appear, seeing as it could potentially not be true), putting equal blame on "the West" isn't actually based on anything other than conjecture.

Its not really speculation that the west was behind the uprising. We have lists of all the Western special interests groups in Ukraine, we can see what the track record is when these special interest groups start poring funds into countries.

Look where Ukraine is What the hell is the doing West all the way over there? Oh and again, when you are invited its not invading. Its like saying the U.S. invaded England in WWII. Oh and I certainly don't see them taking anything at gunpoint, its been pretty peaceful.

**Jihadin**

How many uprising from Arab Spring we prodded on...

**sebster**

Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Right...well I think the idea that encircling Russia with a hostile military alliance and fostering a violent revolution by fascist groups that overthrows a key ally of Russia is not aggression ... is also bonkers.

Silliness. NATO is a defensive pact - it only triggers if one of it's nations is directly attacked. If the US or Germany or some other member wanted to assault Russia, then NATO membership would be utterly irrelevant to ensuring any support or co-operation from the Ukraine.

The reason why NATO is slowly drawing further east is because nations to the east of NATO's previous boundaries are finding better economic opportunities and better treatment from looking West rather than East, and this is leading to interference and threats from Russia.

**Andrew1975**

sebster wrote:
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Right...well I think the idea that encircling Russia with a hostile military alliance and fostering a violent revolution by fascist groups that overthrows a key ally of Russia is not aggression ... is also bonkers.

Silliness. NATO is a defensive pact - it only triggers if one of it's nations is directly attacked. If the US or Germany or some other member wanted to assault Russia, then NATO membership would be utterly irrelevant to ensuring any support or co-operation from the Ukraine.

The reason why NATO is slowly drawing further east is because nations to the east of NATO's previous boundaries are finding better economic opportunities and better treatment from looking West rather than East, and this is leading to interference and threats from Russia.

The reality is that the West, NATO, even the EU is more than a defensive pact, or an Economic union. Its a Click that still sees Russia and the East as something to plunder at the most and to treat as an outsider at the least. Russia deserves a seat at the table and the West continues to peck at its boarders. There are people that want to see the collapse of Europe and America, Russia just wants the East, seam it would be better to make pacts with the devil you know.

I think its highly debatable that Ukraine would be better off aligned with the West then with Russia. Ukraine is not an economic powerhouse, and relies.....much like Europe on Russian energy. Seeing how stable the EU has been lately, I'm beginning to wonder if they are starting to fear Russia's rising economic power, trying to topple and isolate it when its just getting on its feet.

**sebster**

Andrew1975 wrote:
Its a Click that still sees Russia and the East as something to plunder at the most and to treat as an outsider at the least. Russia deserves a seat at the table and the West continues to peck at its boarders.

The 'worst' that you suggest there is fanciful silliness, and really can't be stated in sensible conversation. No-one is looking to plunder Russia.

And no-one is pecking at Russia's borders. The Ukraine is not their territory, as much as they'd like to think they get to decide the future of smaller countries on their boundaries that isn't how the world works. If countries at the borders of Russia are inclined to look at East and not West, then Russia has to face up to the fact that other countries, of their own free will, would prefer closer ties with countries that aren't Russia.

The claim that Russia deserves a seat at 'the table' is also very silly. They are one of the five permanent members of the UN, something that Brazil, Japan and Germany aren't granted, despite each having bigger GDPs than Russia. Russia is in fact given political power far in excess of their real world political relevance, just out of historical inertia. In fact, one of the major reasons Russia is having to resort to crude, direct force by deploying troops as they are is because they simply don't have the soft power lure that they like to think they have.

I think its highly debatable that Ukraine would be better off aligned with the West then with Russia. Ukraine is not an economic powerhouse, and relies.....much like Europe on Russian energy. Seeing how stable the EU has been lately, I'm beginning to wonder if they are starting to fear Russia's rising economic power, trying to topple and isolate it when its just getting on its feet.

You're confusing some really fanciful economic headlines with actual economic realities. The total GDP of Russia about 2 trillion. The EU clocks in at 17 trillion.

And you might point out that that won't last forever because the EU has been economically gakky lately... but Russia has had economics hardships that have mirrored Europe's. It's just they weren't made headlines because Russia is just nowhere near as big of a deal in the world economy.

The idea of Russia rivaling the EU is just a non-starter.

**Ketara**

sebster wrote:

The idea of Russia rivaling the EU is just a non-starter.

Russia on its own perhaps. The economic union that Putin is trying to construct, possibly not. If he manages to reassemble the fragments of the Soviet Union (Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, etc) into an even remotely cohesive unit, it would have considerable economic clout in a self-contained sort of way.

Frankly, in geopolitics these days, the recent trend of bigger states dissolving into smaller fragmentary ones seems to be coming to a close and reversing gear somewhat. I would not be surprised to see the EEC and EU developing into fresh superpowers over the next fifty odd years. It's far from inevitable, but not unlikely. A lot would depend on who takes over the reins when Putin corks it.

On a sidenote, one fact that many Western observers tend to forget about Russia is that they have an economically rapacious and numerically superior Southern neighbour who has been beefing up their military muscle considerably of late. Not all of Putin's actions are necessarily taken as a counterbalancing measure to solely Europe/America.

**AlmightyWalrus**

Andrew1975 wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
The thing is though, all the deals with covert people on both sides working in Ukraine is speculation. Plausible speculation, yes, but still speculation, whereas we know that Russia took part of another nation at gunpoint. Equally blaming "the West" for being aggressive in such a situation is rather unfair. Until we have confirmation of the West's involvment in the riots (which might never appear, seeing as it could potentially not be true), putting equal blame on "the West" isn't actually based on anything other than conjecture.

Its not really speculation that the west was behind the uprising. We have lists of all the Western special interests groups in Ukraine, we can see what the track record is when these special interest groups start poring funds into countries.

If it's not speculation I'm going to have to ask you to provide solid evidence.

Andrew1975 wrote:

Look where Ukraine is What the hell is the doing West all the way over there? Oh and again, when you are invited its not invading. Its like saying the U.S. invaded England in WWII. Oh and I certainly don't see them taking anything at gunpoint, its been pretty peaceful.

Yes, rolling in the Army and then holding a rushed referendum to annex Crimea is perfectly peaceful and in no way taking anything at gunpoint.

The Ukraine is as far to the east as Greece and (parts of) Finland. They're a neighboring country of Poland and very close to the Baltic nations. It's not just Russia's back yard.

Ketara wrote:
sebster wrote:

The idea of Russia rivaling the EU is just a non-starter.

Russia on its own perhaps. The economic union that Putin is trying to construct, possibly not. If he manages to reassemble the fragments of the Soviet Union (Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, etc) into an even remotely cohesive unit, it would have considerable economic clout in a self-contained sort of way.

Ah yes, the economic powerhouses of Central Asia. The world will surely tremble at their awesome economic clout.

**Dreadclaw69**

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/us-troops-head-exercises-eastern-europe-23425093

U.S. Army paratroopers are arriving in Poland to begin a series of military exercises in four countries across Eastern Europe to bolster allies in the wake of Russia's annexation of Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula last month.

Pentagon press secretary Rear Adm. John Kirby said Tuesday that the exercises will last about a month, and initially involve about 600 troops.

An Army company of about 150 soldiers from the 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team based in Vicenza, Italy, will start the exercises Wednesday in Poland. Additional Army companies will head to Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania and are expected to arrive by Monday for similar land-based exercises in those countries.

Under the current plan, U.S. troops would rotate in and out of the four countries for additional exercises on a recurring basis.

"We're looking at trying to keep this rotational presence persistent throughout the rest of this year," Kirby told reporters, adding that over time the exercises could expand to other countries.

The exercises are part of an effort announced last week by Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel aimed at reassuring NATO allies of America's commitment to the region's defense.

Kirby said the U.S. will likely plan other exercises and will continue to work through NATO on joint measures that could be scheduled in the future.

"It's a very tangible representation of our commitment to our security obligations in Europe, and the message is to the people of those countries and to the alliance that we do take it seriously. And we encourage our NATO partners to likewise look for opportunities of their own to do this same kind of thing for one another," said Kirby. "And I think if there's a message to Moscow, it is the same exact message — that we take our obligations very, very seriously on the continent of Europe."

Armed pro-Russia groups have occupied areas in eastern Ukraine and have refused to leave until the country's acting government resigns. There was a burst of violence Sunday, with three people killed during a shootout at a checkpoint manned by pro-Russian troops. The U.S. has asserted that some of the troops are Russian special operations forces, and officials are pressing Russian to abide by an international accord aimed at stemming the crisis in Ukraine.

**Ketara**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Ah yes, the economic powerhouses of Central Asia. The world will surely tremble at their awesome economic clout.

Sarcasm ill becomes you. Note the phrase 'self-contained'. Whilst not major exporters/importers of Western goods compared to say, China, they have a respectable chunk of the world population and a more than respectable share of natural resources.

**Seaward**

A whole company? Wow. The administration doesn't feth around, does it?

**Iron_Captain**

sebster wrote:
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Right...well I think the idea that encircling Russia with a hostile military alliance and fostering a violent revolution by fascist groups that overthrows a key ally of Russia is not aggression ... is also bonkers.

Silliness. NATO is a defensive pact - it only triggers if one of it's nations is directly attacked. If the US or Germany or some other member wanted to assault Russia, then NATO membership would be utterly irrelevant to ensuring any support or co-operation from the Ukraine.

The reason why NATO is slowly drawing further east is because nations to the east of NATO's previous boundaries are finding better economic opportunities and better treatment from looking West rather than East, and this is leading to interference and threats from Russia.

NATO is a defensive pact. Sure. "Defensive" in the same defensive way Russia took over Crimea.

**AlmightyWalrus**

Ketara wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Ah yes, the economic powerhouses of Central Asia. The world will surely tremble at their awesome economic clout.

Sarcasm ill becomes you. Note the phrase 'self-contained'. Whilst not major exporters/importers of Western goods compared to say, China, they have a respectable chunk of the world population and a more than respectable share of natural resources.

In the (very) long time, potentially, but most of the nations ending with -stan are sparesly populated and would require significant infrastructure construction to access the raw materials, and even then the combined population of Kazakhstan, Tadjikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Russia is only about 200 million, whereas the EU has a population of over 500 million.

**Iron_Captain**

sebster wrote:

The idea of Russia rivaling the EU is just a non-starter.

Economically? yes.
But military? A few thousand Russian nukes and most senior policy makers in the West beg to differ.

Ketara wrote:
On a sidenote, one fact that many Western observers tend to forget about Russia is that they have an economically rapacious and numerically superior Southern neighbour who has been beefing up their military muscle considerably of late. Not all of Putin's actions are necessarily taken as a counterbalancing measure to solely Europe/America.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_Cooperation_Organisation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2%80%93Russia_relations

I think Russia has little to fear from China.
China and Russia have too much in common nowadays. They are natural allies.

**Ketara**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Ketara wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Ah yes, the economic powerhouses of Central Asia. The world will surely tremble at their awesome economic clout.

Sarcasm ill becomes you. Note the phrase 'self-contained'. Whilst not major exporters/importers of Western goods compared to say, China, they have a respectable chunk of the world population and a more than respectable share of natural resources.

In the (very) long time, potentially, but most of the nations ending with -stan are sparesly populated and would require significant infrastructure construction to access the raw materials, and even then the combined population of Kazakhstan, Tadjikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Russia is only about 200 million, whereas the EU has a population of over 500 million.

You'll note that I mentioned the timeframe of 'fifty years' as well.

Whilst the EU does have, and will continue to have far more industrialised economic clout globally, the ever increasing demand for resources will put any successful version of the EEC in a good place economically as time progresses, and will possibly allow it to punch above its weight. It's all very well and good to have the greater numbers of factories and population, but if you have no natural resources to pump into both of those things, you're forced to dicker accordingly with those who do. That or invade them.

There's also the fact that Russia itself is industrialised and high tech enough so as to not quite be in the same position as China with regards to needing to import Western high tech goods and services. I'm not saying that they're self-sufficient or an economic island, far from it, but they're better positioned to attempt to promote domestic production and consumption, and less vulnerable to the Western markets.

Iron_Captain wrote:

I think Russia has little to fear from China.
China and Russia have too much in common nowadays. They are natural allies.

I do not see China invading Russia any time soon. However, anyone with any notion of global history can tell you what usually happens when one nation has many things another nation wants, and is considerably militarily weaker.

Putin keeps a wary eye on the Chinese, because a) China and Russia have had something of a turbulent history over the last hundred years, b) the Chinese population and industry outstrips his own considerably, and c)the Chinese have vastly ramped up their military spending of late.

**Dreadclaw69**

Seaward wrote:
A whole company? Wow. The administration doesn't feth around, does it?

Anything more and we'll be accused of escalating the situation. After all, we wouldn't want to upset thousands of Russian soldiers just conducting exercises on the border with Ukraine

**AlmightyWalrus**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Seaward wrote:
A whole company? Wow. The administration doesn't feth around, does it?

Anything more and we'll be accused of escalating the situation. After all, we wouldn't want to upset thousands of Russian soldiers just conducting exercises on the border with Ukraine

Wait, couldn't we argue that the troops would have been invited and as such totally OK?

**Dreadclaw69**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Wait, couldn't we argue that the troops would have been invited and as such totally OK?

We could. But sadly some useful idiot will still bleat about US escalation, while ignoring Russia's actions to date.

Is this a new record for us not disagreeing?

**AlmightyWalrus**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Wait, couldn't we argue that the troops would have been invited and as such totally OK?

We could. But sadly some useful idiot will still bleat about US escalation, while ignoring Russia's actions to date.

Is this a new record for us not disagreeing?

We're actually disagreeing, it's just a plot to make us look as though we're not.

**Sigvatr**

Just to get that right - if any given country wants a piece of another country, it just sends its troops in it, removes the signs representing them as a part of the country, creates an atmosphere of fear and control, force military controlled votes to be absorbed by the home country and then rightfully keep it?

That's awesome!

**AlmightyWalrus**

I was thinking, us Swedes could totally give everyone in Russia a Swedish citizenship and then claim that all of Russia should totally be Swedish becuase there's a lot of people with Swedish citizenship living there and because we sailed around in rivers in the 800's, right?

**Andrew1975**

Sigvatr wrote:
Just to get that right - if any given country wants a piece of another country, it just sends its troops in it, removes the signs representing them as a part of the country, creates an atmosphere of fear and control, force military controlled votes to be absorbed by the home country and then rightfully keep it?

That's awesome!

No, apparently you just need to start a revolution and immediately recognize them as a legitimate government.

**Dreadclaw69**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
We're actually disagreeing, it's just a plot to make us look as though we're not.

Cool, I must have missed that memo

Sigvatr wrote:
Just to get that right - if any given country wants a piece of another country, it just sends its troops in it, removes the signs representing them as a part of the country, creates an atmosphere of fear and control, force military controlled votes to be absorbed by the home country and then rightfully keep it?

That's awesome!

So close. You're missing one vital component - you claim the right to invade based on some people in your soon-to-be-new-territory having once lived in your country.

**AlmightyWalrus**

Andrew1975 wrote:
Sigvatr wrote:
Just to get that right - if any given country wants a piece of another country, it just sends its troops in it, removes the signs representing them as a part of the country, creates an atmosphere of fear and control, force military controlled votes to be absorbed by the home country and then rightfully keep it?

That's awesome!

No, apparently you just need to start a revolution and immediately recognize them as a legitimate government.

As a legitimate interim government. There's a referendum coming, remember? You know, a referendum that's been allowed time to be planned as opposed to a 3-day rushed referendum under gunpoint.

**-Shrike-**

Ah yes, the legitimate interim government, not recognised by around a third of the country, and whose first actions were to attempt to outlaw Russian as an official language. Brilliant.